12
And what if you are just preventing teams from even taking shots, that why I find the chart a bit odd. It assumes that many shots that do not lead to goals shows defensive organisation and competence, when actually it could mean something completely different like having an incredible keeper or teams just taking pot shots from outside the box often.
Exactly, when you concede 17 shots per games you are not competent and if your opponents can't score they are themselves incompetent.
Keep ball didn't fail vs Arsenal since vs Arsenal we didn't keep the ball. We were just a shower of shite in that game with no organisation defensively or in the midfield, which actually was a bit of a red hearing when you look at our season.
That's kind of the point...
I'm aware of that, my point was that 1. The arsenal game was a red hearing. 2 There were other things in our game wrong like the lack of coordination in pressing etc. Again vs Arsenal I believe we won the posession.
No, it punishes teams whose keepers don't keep out shots. When ours is De Gea you see the problem is elsewhere as he's hardly one to throw them into the net.
Actually if you're conceding 17 shots per game and conceding the same number of goals as a team that only concedes 9, it shows that you're better at restricting the areas that opposition teams can play in and limiting their ability to move the ball into dangerous areas. We fail to do when our primary tactic of keeping the ball breaks down because we have good individual defenders but a relatively poor unit.
Or it could show that the other teams were just incompetent in finishing chances... Basically you are making far too many assumptions. There is a chart that could prove your point though, that one you posted just isn't the correct one
We won possession because Arsenal went 3-0 up and then played on the counter. And as I said, the Arsenal game isn't a great example because we came up against much better players. Better examples are the games I listed.
Except that doesn't actually make a difference because you're all playing the same teams over the course of a season and the only constant in those games is yourself.
I know that, but it doesn't make any distinction, which means it making assupmtions and jumping to conclusions. Which means it doesn't actually show what you are saying it shows, since there could be another plausable explanation.
But we haven't played the same teams yet, at the exception of Tottenham.
And we know how that went down.... 0 conceeded vs ...
We've played 9 essentially random teams from a pool of 19 selected teams, that trail of argument is a stretch.
We played five teams from the top 10, they played 3 and we conceded less goals. It's not random random, the teams aren't equal. This chart will be interesting at the end of the season, he will still be useless by himself but still interesting.
Consider the majority of the goals we've conceded.
And for every goal a team concedes there are 3 others where they don't for similar reasons. De Gea doesn't have much to do and yet when he does it's far more dangerous.
I've already said I consider Arsenal and City without Kompany poor this year. Those stats simply reinforce the principle. In fact the defensive standard all round has been pretty average, City were looking exceptional until Kompany was out and then it all went to shit
Pretty sure because LVG trusts Jones on the ball more than Smalling. The heatmaps showed that he played more towards the rightback position when Valencia pushes up, so he actually saw a lot of the ball.
